Third-Party Chattel - Re: Distrainment (CTA): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Eviction (Commercial Tenancy)]]
[[Category:Eviction (Commercial Tenancy)]]
==859587 Ontario Ltd. v. Starmark Property Management Ltd., 1997 CanLII 12153 (ON SC)<ref name="Starmark"/>==
The language of that provision is interesting. It <b><u>permits a landlord to distrain the interest of a tenant in goods owned by a third party, but in the possession of a tenant under a conditional sales contract. Since the tenant's interest includes the right to possess the goods, the landlord can take possession of them, and hold them, but does so subject to the rights of the owner.</b></u> Similarly, if the landlord sells such an item pursuant to s. 53, the sale is subject to the rights of the unpaid vendor. This, I believe, is what was decided by the Divisional Court, on appeal from the Chancery Division, in Carroll v. Beard (1895), 27 O.R. 349, in circumstances somewhat similar to these. The court was called upon to consider the very exception in issue here, which had been passed only shortly before, in 1894. As a consequence of this provision, MacMahon J. made an order restraining the landlord from selling certain distrained property "except subject to the rights of the plaintiffs as unpaid vendors". In upholding this decision, Boyd C. stated, at p. 358, "only the interest of Yorke [the tenant] in the goods could be sold, and not the corpus of the goods. His interest would be just what would be left after the balance of price is deducted out of the value of the goods seized".
<ref name="Starmark">859587 Ontario Ltd. v. Starmark Property Management Ltd., 1997 CanLII 12153 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vv87>, retrieved on 2020-08-07</ref>
==References==

Revision as of 20:54, 7 August 2020


859587 Ontario Ltd. v. Starmark Property Management Ltd., 1997 CanLII 12153 (ON SC)[1]

The language of that provision is interesting. It permits a landlord to distrain the interest of a tenant in goods owned by a third party, but in the possession of a tenant under a conditional sales contract. Since the tenant's interest includes the right to possess the goods, the landlord can take possession of them, and hold them, but does so subject to the rights of the owner. Similarly, if the landlord sells such an item pursuant to s. 53, the sale is subject to the rights of the unpaid vendor. This, I believe, is what was decided by the Divisional Court, on appeal from the Chancery Division, in Carroll v. Beard (1895), 27 O.R. 349, in circumstances somewhat similar to these. The court was called upon to consider the very exception in issue here, which had been passed only shortly before, in 1894. As a consequence of this provision, MacMahon J. made an order restraining the landlord from selling certain distrained property "except subject to the rights of the plaintiffs as unpaid vendors". In upholding this decision, Boyd C. stated, at p. 358, "only the interest of Yorke [the tenant] in the goods could be sold, and not the corpus of the goods. His interest would be just what would be left after the balance of price is deducted out of the value of the goods seized".

[1]


References

  1. 1.0 1.1 859587 Ontario Ltd. v. Starmark Property Management Ltd., 1997 CanLII 12153 (ON SC), <http://canlii.ca/t/1vv87>, retrieved on 2020-08-07